A single, solid POWER RATING?? [Archive] - Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com

sq764

12-18-2004, 02:09 PM

Speed Figure

12-18-2004, 02:21 PM

That's what Prime Power trys to do.

Larry Hamilton

12-18-2004, 02:45 PM

I am sure there are data base guys who play with a single number. I am equally certain that anyone with such a number is a lone wolf because the perfect number will have three elements: win%, roi, and frequency. Diminishing any of that through distribution could turn this golden number useless.

sjk

12-18-2004, 07:20 PM

If the numbers would be derived solely from looking at the individual horse's PPs, I would not think the rankings would be a very definitive indication of the horses' probability of winning.

An analysis of how the race will be run involving the interaction between the runners and today's race conditions is going to add a lot of information that I don't think you can safely ignore.

Obviously, if you do a thorough job of handicapping the race and assign probabilities of winning to each horse, these probabilities could serve as comprehensive ratings. In doing this I would need to go well beyond looking at the horses one by one.

sq764

12-18-2004, 07:32 PM

Originally posted by sjk
If the numbers would be derived solely from looking at the individual horse's PPs, I would not think the rankings would be a very definitive indication of the horses' probability of winning.

An analysis of how the race will be run involving the interaction between the runners and today's race conditions is going to add a lot of information that I don't think you can safely ignore.

Obviously, if you do a thorough job of handicapping the race and assign probabilities of winning to each horse, these probabilities could serve as comprehensive ratings. In doing this I would need to go well beyond looking at the horses one by one.

Well, the reason i ask is that I am getting comfortable with a harness power figure that I have been working on.. I think it's a bit easier to put together in harness because 99.9% of the races are at 1 mile.. Just wasn't sure if there was anything along these lines for the t-breds/

dav4463

12-18-2004, 11:16 PM

Barry Meadows Master Win Ratings are a single number rating the horse.

Tom

12-19-2004, 12:51 AM

HTR has it's K rating - close to a be-all number. Top two win generally 50% of the races (30-20), but in some cases, K1 goes up to around 40+ percent. There is a betting line generated from the K ratings.

sjk

12-19-2004, 08:47 AM

sq764,

I'm sure harness racing is quite different from flat racing as are dirt and turf racing from one another.

There is a half mile harness track not far from here that I attended many years ago. At the time it seemed quite significant when a horse drew the outside post because the first turn came up so quickly. Would this be incorporated into your figure, accounted for separately or ignored?

sq764

12-19-2004, 09:03 AM

Originally posted by sjk
sq764,

I'm sure harness racing is quite different from flat racing as are dirt and turf racing from one another.

There is a half mile harness track not far from here that I attended many years ago. At the time it seemed quite significant when a horse drew the outside post because the first turn came up so quickly. Would this be incorporated into your figure, accounted for separately or ignored?

Well yes and no :-)

One of the hardest things to do for harness is to weight post positions on 1/2 mile tracks. For that very reason, I only use these power #'s for mile and 7/8 mile tracks (Meadowlands, Balmoral Park, Woodbine, Mohawk, Cal Expo, Hoosier...)..

On half mile tracks, driver are SUCH an influence and such a factor that they must be factored in somehow... I am not quite sure how that is going to happen, so for now I am focusing on the mile ovals...

thoroughbred

12-19-2004, 02:23 PM

Go to our website:
www.revelationprofits.com

At "Documentation" click on "Addendum to Engineering Analysis of Thoroughbred Racing."

There you will see the complete derivation of the "Boxer Number" which gives you an overall rating of a horse's capability for each one of his pacelines.

Jeff P

12-19-2004, 04:43 PM

Just thinking outloud here...

Most every decent software package has its own form of a "power rating."

I've dabbled at this, perhaps with some small degree of success, perhaps not.

I know this has been bantered about to no effect before, but I think it might be kind of cool to see a software contest where the various entrants simply post the top "power rating" horse from each software.

I'm up for it. Any takers? :D :D

ratpack

12-20-2004, 10:06 AM

I did like the way Equisim handled its "Power or Consensus" rating in that it let you control the factors that went into it.

When I used it I found that eliminating the Owner and Sire rating from the mix got me much better results.

Fred

12-20-2004, 07:27 PM

Originally posted by ratpack
I did like the way Equisim handled its "Power or Consensus" rating in that it let you control the factors that went into it.

When I used it I found that eliminating the Owner and Sire rating from the mix got me much better results.

I use Equisim and not aware of any "Power or Consensus" rating unless you are referring to Compilation in the profiler view.

Freddy

ratpack

12-20-2004, 07:45 PM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Fred
[B]I use Equisim and not aware of any "Power or Consensus" rating unless you are referring to Compilation in the profiler view.

That is what I was referring to

Blackgold

12-21-2004, 08:13 PM

I have found Michael Pizzolla's PPF (projected power fraction) to be, as he calls it in his book "Handicapping Magic", the handicapper's secret weapon.

Case in point, Monday's 5th at CRC. The 3,6,8,11 were the gapped PPF runners in this turf event, with the 3 being the Value Tech selection.

The public hammered the 1, 'cause it ran earlier at SAR or some other big name track.

The 3 paid $24 in the win hole. The exacta paid $117.40. The tri $364.70 and the super $3007.90 for a buck.

Simply boxing those top PPF runners brought a nice x-mas gift.

Of course, you need to evaluate runners on current form, layoffs, claims, etc. and decide who to use, but sometimes it is as simple as boxing the top numbers.

The PPF often turns in big paydays for turf events. And it is amazing as a track to track comparision number.

Of course it doesn't take into consideration class, breeding, etc. The BRIS prime number had the 1 some 14 points over the $24 winner. I often consult BRIS to see who will get hammered on the tote and see if I can find any opportunities from it.

But, I would have netted even more if the entire investment was in the win hole instead of getting involved in the exotics. Still, I take what they give me, pay taxes on that and download the next days card.

Anyway, back to the original thread question- the answer is, try the PPF.

NoDayJob

12-21-2004, 10:08 PM

Originally posted by sq764
Has anyone been successful at designating each horse with a single power rating? Something that encompasses all handicapping factors into one single #? I have seen many attempts to do so that didn't seen very effective...

I remember when I was at Del Mar, they sold a sheet or program that attempted to assing a single numerical power rating to each horse that was in today, but I am not sure how that worked out.

Is there anything like this that has been successful?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

If there is a power number that produces consistant results, it probably won't be available commercially; simply, because if it's any good the person developing it wouldn't sell it, for obvious reasons. It's best if you develop your own rating method.

-NDJ

The Pro

01-12-2005, 10:14 AM

Has anyone been successful at designating each horse with a single power rating? Something that encompasses all handicapping factors into one single #? I have seen many attempts to do so that didn't seen very effective...

I remember when I was at Del Mar, they sold a sheet or program that attempted to assing a single numerical power rating to each horse that was in today, but I am not sure how that worked out.

Is there anything like this that has been successful?

I see someone mentioned prime power, but have you tried it? It's a fantastic tool!

Top Prime Power horses by three full points (3.0+) or better win 39% of the time!
Top Prime Power horses by six full points (6.0+) or better win 46% of the time!
Top Prime Power horses by ten full points (10.0+) or better win 55% of the time!

All that and positive R.O.I makes Prime Power indeed very powerful.

Link: http://www.ampmracing.com/prime_power.html

All the best,
Gary

01-12-2005, 10:42 AM

Gary,

Are you trying to say these Prime Power stats you give also have a positive ROI? I think that has been proven wrong here a few times already, but I'm willing to listen.

The Pro

01-12-2005, 11:04 AM

Gary,

Are you trying to say these Prime Power stats you give also have a positive ROI? I think that has been proven wrong here a few times already, but I'm willing to listen.

Hi,

Yes, from the tests I have conducted and actual races wagered, you can get a positive ROI of about 25% if you only wager on races where the top prime power horse is tops by 6 points or more and wheel that horse not to win, but to place second with the next 4 top power horses in exactas and trifectas. If you wheel that horse on top you fall into negative ROI.

I have been unable to get a positive ROI on a straight wager. However BRIS still claims the +10 horse yields a small + ROI. But these horses are almost always "odds-on" chalk so I have little interest in those.

Guess I should have explained the posiitive ROI in my other post... sorry.

All the best,
Gary

sq764

01-12-2005, 11:39 AM

You would have been fine if you stopped at 'Prime Power is a fantastic TOOL'...

That part could be true.

The Pro

01-12-2005, 11:50 AM

You would have been fine if you stopped at 'Prime Power is a fantastic TOOL'...

That part could be true.

Sorry, I disagree. I've used prime power for two years and it has served me very well in the exotics.

Gary

sq764

01-12-2005, 12:04 PM

The Pro

01-12-2005, 12:12 PM

I don't think you read my comment right, I wasn't really disagreeing with your post, just the last part..

I think your initial post insinuated that simply flat bet wagering on the prime power horses that were 10+ points higher would turn a positive ROI..

OOPS! :confused: My sincere apologies. You are correct, I misread your intent and also didn't give enough information in my first post. It's been a very long 24 hrs for me.

Do you play blackjack? If so, email me a username and password you would like and I'll give you access to a private site detailing a new method of play that will be in the bookstores in June - July.

eMail: gary@triangleblackjack.com

I wish you continued success.

Gary

sq764

01-12-2005, 01:12 PM

Sorry, no blackjack for me.. Only Holdem/Omaha and horses..

First_Place

01-16-2005, 05:16 AM

Jeff P thought out loud:

"If electricity comes from electrons, does morality come from morons?"

Of course not, silly. It (morality) comes from morals. Duh!

"Oxymorons are two parts oxygen and one part moron." Right Jeff?

Nothing personal. :) I just don't dig wise-ass cracks designed to insult and denigrate folks who do have moral standards. Too much of that hurled our way ad nauseam from those most 'tolerant' propagators of political correctness in the mainstream press, Hollywood, etc. I spit at them.

Like I said, nothing personal. :) Just sick and tired of the insults.

FP

hdcper

01-16-2005, 10:03 AM

First Place I am confused here. Who is this post directed at and why?

Thanks,

Bill

Jeff P

01-16-2005, 01:04 PM

My "Thinking Outloud" post in this thread was not intended as an insult to anybody. If you read it that way you're misjudging me severely. The words in my signature line are not my own. In fact, it's a quote from Gallagher, the comedian. I chose it becasue I found it hilarious (and still do.) :D

So far as the title of this thread goes, A Single Solid Power Rating, I happen to think that the historical win rate and roi of my JRating happens to fit the bill quite nicely. Some may agree with me. Others may not. What I suggested in the body of my post was that we act on an idea that's been batted around here off and on for quite a while now: Let's have a software contest to compare the single solid power ratings right out of the box from various programs. So far no takers.